header-logo header-logo

04 April 2025
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Legal News , Consumer , Commercial , Financial services litigation
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: What’s driving the FirstRand case?

214558
The Johnson v FirstRand Bank case on ‘secret’ commissions for motor finance is causing quite a stir, but should it have been brought at all? In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, writes: ‘The whole premise of the case is false; there were no real “commissions”, let alone fiduciary relationships.’

Philpott takes the case apart, much as a mechanic might do. He believes the real driver in this case is the claims management industry. Litigators, banks and financiers will be watching the Supreme Court, which began hearing the high-stakes case this week. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll